dog-on

Thanks for the response. To be clear, the interpretation I posted earlier was just an attempt to illustrate the possibility and was not meant to be taken as a literal attempt at a translation.

One reason that this exegesis caught my attention is because I have heard something similar, albeit from a differing perspective. I have been told, by Evangelicals, that in order to truly understand the scriptures one must be guided by the Holy Spirit. It just seems funny that these Evangelicals may have been more correct than they might actually like to be.

Another reason why I was attracted to such a solution is due to the juxtaposition of the flesh and the spirit, throughout the epistles.

If we put aside Acts and simply look at Paul, is it really necessary to envision him as being fundamentally distinct, in mindset though perhaps not specifically in actual belief, from a modern Evangelical Christian?

Does Paul simply, as we hear all the time from Evangelicals today, get filled with the spirit?

Price mentioned that the snippet was thought to be an insertion, by scholarship. My personal bias toward the Christian scriptures is that it seems more likely than not to assume that these writings were in a state of flux during the second century, to include the Pauline writings. So my position regarding Romans, like all of Paul, is to assume orthodox redaction until proven otherwise.

Solo

That would be the simplest explanation given as Price pointed out, 2 Cor 5:16, which directly contradicts Rom 1:3. The formula "according to spirit of holiness" in 1:4 (kata pneuma hagiosynes) also looks like a later church mint rather than Pauline nomenclature.

Jiri

aa5874

There is no such thing as Holy Spirit guidance. No one can define or prove that there is a Holy Spirit or show that the Holy Spirit did guide anyone at any time.

When you put Acts aside from which century would you look at Paul? Who was Paul without ACTS? The history of Paul is in Acts and even if you try to reconstruct Paul from his own writings the reconstruction must be demolished with the ACTS.

No!

The Pauline writings are the product of forgeries, interpolations and redactions.

Clivedurdle

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=g...page&q&f=false

See the introduction.

We are living in Orthodoxworld, and it is difficult to dig out the according to the spirit that underlies it all - we are very used to the orthodox heresy of a flesh and blood christ.

Porgy and Bess - it ain't necessarily so!